At 8:16 AM -0700 4/16/08, The IESG wrote:
o Approved - The errata is appropriate under the criteria below and
should be available to implementors or people deploying the RFC.
o Archived - The errata is not a necessary update to the RFC.
However, any future update of the document should consider this
errata, and determine whether it is correct and merits including
in the update.
Assuming that both categories will be in the errata repository, the
difference between these two may be clear to the IESG, but it will
not be clear to readers of the errata. I suspect that the two
categories were created so that the IESG only needs to consider
"errors that could cause implementation or deployment problems or
significant confusion", not the minor stuff, but this differentiation
will simply cause more arguments about what errors would cause
problems of what magnitude.
In the end, it is probably better for readers of the errata to have
just one category, and for the IESG to not waste its time
differentiating between the two categories.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf